Finally had the mental energy this morning to rather randomly come here. "Whitehead" can be a trigger for me. Can't / won't consume audio, so downloaded Segall's paper and got through the first seven pages. What fun! Not only Whitehead's language and notions but the way the paper looks at them as they developed throughout his life.
The fact that Whitehead and the rest of us are working in English allows me to assume that his ideas, mediated through Segall's summary and interpretation, are somewhat accessible to my understanding. I'm certainly picking up a wealth of subjective meaning in the paper - mostly in terms of awe at all the different ways or perspectives Whitehead finds for exploring his notions. The words he uses certainly resonate with the ways that I look at existence these days.
(Some personal context: I'm off into panentheism and what might be called speciesism, with an aim of moderating humanity's hubris and restoring permission to be spiritual to secular rationalists. The reference to mistaking a green snake for a stick on page 4 brings to mind the time I was sitting in the grass with a kitten. I accidentally dropped my pen into the grass and the kitten leapt up about two feet in a panic. I could only assume it was experiencing an instinctual reaction to "a snake in the grass." I tried it again, but the kitten had already learned the difference.)
All I can do at this stage in life is express my appreciation for the availability of ideas like these. Injecting fragments of my own perspective might open a few tiny windows here or there.
That is so crazy!?! But I agree Matt. For me with no previous knowledge of Whitehead besides the one I hear you share sometimes, that did offer a decent entryway to his thinking on this particular subject. Now off to try this out for myself. :)
Eons ago during those leisurely/scholarly days, I laid down some kind of short-of-PhD foundation for this type of talk by reading a lot of philosophy and theology. Then after I retired I was astounded to discover that the cognitive underpinnings were still there; in fact, my ability to understand "philosophy-talk" seems to have improved over the years while my mind was absorbed with the practical stuff of my career. Keep on reading and thinking.
Finally had the mental energy this morning to rather randomly come here. "Whitehead" can be a trigger for me. Can't / won't consume audio, so downloaded Segall's paper and got through the first seven pages. What fun! Not only Whitehead's language and notions but the way the paper looks at them as they developed throughout his life.
The fact that Whitehead and the rest of us are working in English allows me to assume that his ideas, mediated through Segall's summary and interpretation, are somewhat accessible to my understanding. I'm certainly picking up a wealth of subjective meaning in the paper - mostly in terms of awe at all the different ways or perspectives Whitehead finds for exploring his notions. The words he uses certainly resonate with the ways that I look at existence these days.
(Some personal context: I'm off into panentheism and what might be called speciesism, with an aim of moderating humanity's hubris and restoring permission to be spiritual to secular rationalists. The reference to mistaking a green snake for a stick on page 4 brings to mind the time I was sitting in the grass with a kitten. I accidentally dropped my pen into the grass and the kitten leapt up about two feet in a panic. I could only assume it was experiencing an instinctual reaction to "a snake in the grass." I tried it again, but the kitten had already learned the difference.)
All I can do at this stage in life is express my appreciation for the availability of ideas like these. Injecting fragments of my own perspective might open a few tiny windows here or there.
https://footnotes2plato.substack.com/p/whiteheads-eternal-objects-from-a
Thanks so much for stopping by and having a look at my paper. I am glad you found it accessible!
That is so crazy!?! But I agree Matt. For me with no previous knowledge of Whitehead besides the one I hear you share sometimes, that did offer a decent entryway to his thinking on this particular subject. Now off to try this out for myself. :)
Philosophers need to learn how to talk like people.
Eons ago during those leisurely/scholarly days, I laid down some kind of short-of-PhD foundation for this type of talk by reading a lot of philosophy and theology. Then after I retired I was astounded to discover that the cognitive underpinnings were still there; in fact, my ability to understand "philosophy-talk" seems to have improved over the years while my mind was absorbed with the practical stuff of my career. Keep on reading and thinking.
(Not Heidegger though)
or... maybe now they don't
“Why should we care about eternal objects in 2024?” 🤣